Search the Community

I know probably after reading this you guys will think I've lost my mind, maybe I have. I just woke up from an in between sleep/waking state in which I was meditating in my dream. When I woke up my body felt like I was covered in pounds of a black tar, a deep humming and vibration was so loud I could barely hear anything else, and it was like I was moving in slow motion. Literally when I tried to bend down towards the ground I felt resistance that acted against gravity. There were red lights coating the inside of the walls like they were glowing red, and reality fluctuated for about 5 seconds in which reality reacted to my thoughts, the cats in the house started going absolute bat shit. I wasn't anywhere near an area where dishes fell and broke, nor were the cats on the counter to knock them off. The other person here where I am staying woke up as well as if having a nightmare. I am still pretty shaken up, I am still biting my finger to try and determine if I am dreaming. Not sure what to make of it.

Not my own, but the greatest, most dangerous conspiracy theory ever. "Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves." -Bill Hicks

It was obviously a hurried and unthoughtful reply. You missed out on a few other points I addressed, namely your faulty line of reasoning for the dependence of cause and effect on cause and effect, the perception of conventions (not concepts) vs. spontaneous action, the example of the experience of the chair by three different perceptions, the extreme conclusion one draws that experience does not exist from the principle of dependent origination (a lucid dream can be said to exist if its affects are tangible and lasting). As for your point on addiction, you just simply restated what you wrote before without replying to my points. But more irritatingly, these are mere statements. I can write a load of statements without explanations and just say they are true. If you are not going to support your statements it is no longer a discussion, but both sides merely making statements. If I write: there's a flying spaghetti monster who is the creator of this world And you write: that's false, because a, b, and c And I write back: no that's not true, because there's a flying spaghetti monster who is the creator of this world That's not a discussion worth having. As for the powers, you mentioned the shamatha stages as methods of attaining powers, but it turns out you were just talking out of your ass. You don't know anything about them.

i agree with the past 3 posts. thanks for sharing. for me and maybe we are all wired a little differently? as for me it is hard to intellectually make a decison to be sympathetic. in my case it just naturally flows out from my heart. let it out from within some you lose some you win i can drift i can dream til I float off your screen and I just can't pour my heart out to another living thing i m a whisper i'm a shadow but I'm standing up to sing i do agree to the extent that we do make a choice. i choose not to suffer (no matter what) i look at this life as an incredible opportunity. i consider it an amazing and wonderful privilege to be here in the now.

Won't do detailed reply from phone. What dependently originates is empty of any core, substance, inherent reality whatsoever. Hence, empty and illusory. Spontaneous does not mean causeless, it means no independent agent/controller. My life is like a lucid dream - dream doesn't cease but I do not conceive anything as real. Actions are non conceptual and spontaneous. Addiction is habitual craving. Craving requires object of craving, even if it is a sense of security. If there is no independent core, it means existence cannot be established. Existence requires an entity as a base. If an entity cannot be established, the four extremes of existence, non existence, both and neither don't apply. I only said you do not need to be enlightened to have powers. You derailed the discussion.

Are you saying that knowledge arises without a cause, out of nothing? Then it's not dependently originated. Oh, so you do perceive conventions. And you do identify (a unicorn making a noise). You do perceive movement. You just decide to label it false instead of true. Now does saying in the dream, that the unicorn is false, make the unicorn go away?

Having previous experience of rain and acting according to that knowledge may not be a conceptual inference. It can simply be a non-inferential, non-conceptual, spontaneous action. You do not actually have to conceive of the inherent existence of rain and the likes. It is not contradictory. Only sentient beings perceive the real existence of cause and effects, and it is valid from the perspective of deluded cognition. It is not seen as valid in wisdom. Like in a dream, you perceive the unicorn making a loud sound. You say the unicorn made the loud sound. That is valid only as conventionally observed phenomena, but that conventional truth is actually ultimately false. There is no real unicorn that caused/made a real loud sound.

Those who cling only to the first and/or second Turning remain attached to the phenomenal self,...whereas through all Turnings, the potential to realize "other" is uncovered. Luminosity is only perceived within phenomena, and all phenomena is empty,...thus, luminosity and the emptiness of phenomena is inseparable. The inseparability (and impermanence) of Luminosity and Emptiness is not Buddha Mind,...Buddha Mind is the understanding of the inseparability of luminosity and emptiness. Undivided Light is neither luminous nor empty, in the sense that Form is Empty and Empty is Form. Undivided Light, like Noumena, is empty of form, and thus empty of the emptiness of form. As Undivided Light, Sakyamuni, the Tathagata, has not moved a single centimeter in all eternity. Form and the emptiness of Form is always in motion. All motion is within time. Buddha Mind pivots upon a ground that is not of time. There is no Present in time. There are two Buddhisms,...a Buddhism of scripturual belief and indoctrination,...and a Buddhism of what the scriptures point to. What Buddhism points to cannot be directly experienced through belief or indoctrination. The first two Turnings were for the most ignorant of sentient beings,...anyone who has comprehended the Mahaparanirvana will have realized that. There is no permanent "thinking self", nor an Brahman Self,...they are aspects of phenomena. However, popping the alaya of luminousity, unfolds a direct experience with the Buddha Mind that is aware of the inseparability of things. Atisha said, and with important reason, to find the consciousness one had before they were born,...one's Unborn Awareness. Find that awareness,...not scriptural quotes to make your beliefs more palatable. Experience born of beliefs can only be experienced through the conditions of those beliefs. Buddha Mind cannot be understood through conditions. As Avalokitesvara said, the entire illusion was never really there,...and although at first there is luminousity, this is unreal as well. Avalokitesvara's Dharma Gate, as detailed in the Shurangama sutra, which Buddha agreed was the best way (among those discussed in the Shurangama)) to awaken, is quite simple,...it only takes the understanding of one sense, for all the senses to collapse, and Full Spectrum Consciousness to be uncovered. Of course, Full Spectrum Consciousness is not Full Buddha Mind,...but without Full Spectrum Consciousness, which includes the direct understanding that Form is Empty and Empty is Form,...compassion, and nirvana, is impossible. Avalokitesvara correctly stated that everything that happens is just like a dream. And that (Shurangama sutra) as soon as one sense-organ returns to, or is in alignment with Source, all the six are liberated. That cannot be realized by those seeking Brahman or Luminosity. Avalokitesvara correctly states (in the Shurangama) that the truly eternal is entirely beyond arising and ceasing. That which is aware of entirely beyond arising and ceasing is called a Tathagata. V

Negation only applies to delusion. When there is no delusion, there is no negation necessary. Therefore there is no position being put forth. It is not for example, my position is A, therefore B and C is wrong. It is that, A, B, C, are all delusional. I do not propose the A is non-existent, or existent. I only say that the view that A is existent is false, without proposing that A is non-existent. If you do not have delusion, there is no need to negate, the negation of intrinsic nature is merely of therapeutic value pertaining to the delusion of sentient beings. It is like healing the cataracts of sentient being that produce deluded view. I do not have positions. And please don't make nonsensical deductions like "That I do not have position is a position", for that would be as ridiculous as saying "That I have no cheese is a cheese". Ultimately, nothing becomes another thing. Anatta and emptiness deconstructs the view of 'something becoming something'. There is no 'one's location' at all - it is as delusional as 'the location of santa claus', so how can you be mindful of it? However, you can certainly be aware that there is a felt (deluded) sense of self and location. The only way to resolve it is by realization of anatta and emptiness. It is like 'notice the fact that ....' It is a fact that can be noticed. There is no self. It is not a matter of agreeing to it. You are simply looking at your experience as it is, and you discover that the sense of self is utterly delusional, fictional, has no bearing to reality at all. There is no seer seeing the seen, seeing is simply the seen without the seer, you discover that the view 'seer-seeing-seen' is false and delusional. Causes and conditions is not 'movement'. Nothing is a movement. A is not B, but B is a manifestation of all of not-B including A. But it is not the case that A moved into B, because A abides in the phenomenal expression of A and B in B, etc. Dogen: Firewood becomes ash, and it does not become firewood again. Yet, do not suppose that the ash is future and the firewood past. You should understand that firewood abides in the phenomenal expression of firewood, which fully includes past and future and is independent of past and future. Ash abides in the phenomenal expression of ash, which fully includes future and past. Just as firewood does not become firewood again after it is ash, you do not return to birth after death. Identification is all conventional truth on the pre or uninvestigated level. When you realize ultimate truth, conventional truth no longer applies, or is seen through as delusional. But on the conventional, deluded level of conventions which is how we communicate, we can talk about a self as if it remains the same self from yesterday to today, we can talk about objects, etc as if they 'exist', and so on. But that doesn't mean they are ultimately true. I don't identify anything. You don't need to establish A and B. You just need to deconstruct the view that links A with B. At this point everything is felt disjoint in the sense that everything is spontaneous, insubstantial, bubble-like without a self linking manifestation. There is no self linking A and B. Of course even A and B is not truly existing, but first you should realize the emptiness of self. Then after emptiness of self is realized, you go on to realize emptiness of objects. Then you see that A is just an appearance without a truly existing A-ness. B is without B-ness. All is illusory like a dream, like mirage, like a magician's trick. The discovery of I AM is not made from inference. Non-dual is not made from inference. Anatta is not made from inference. Emptiness is not made for inference. I'll give you a hint: no true realization is made from inference. I've done my investigation and relying on my own knowledge now. My practice is now not done for enlightenment but an expression of enlightenment. In other words, I used to sit with a purpose, now in sitting it is just sitting, the sound of air con humming, the cooling sensation on my skin, and so on. That alone is buddha-nature/primordial purity/enlightenment. On the other hand if you still have uninvestigated notions or views of inherent existence or self, you should continue investigating until they are seen through in realization. All inference process are pre-realization... For example in self-inquiry, many thoughts arise like 'I am so and so'... but maybe through an inference or just a sheer moment of clarity you see that such notions are arbitrary and mentally created, so you drop them and continue investigating until you discover the I AMness prior to all concepts. But it does not mean I AMness is discovered inferrentially - it is a non-conceptual, non-inferred certainty of Being. The inference part is not even necessary as some people don't even go through that inference process, some people awake to it spontaneously, or whatever. But if the inference part is necessary to let you see the ridiculousness of some of the concepts then I say go ahead, but don't forget that intellectual reasoning etc has nothing to do with the real self-inquiry that results in a non-conceptual moment of seeing as it is. In other words you can engage in endless reasoning and inference due to the endless scenarios and imagination of the mind for a hundred years and still not wake up to I AM, or you can take a short moment and truly, with deep curiosity, inquire and investigate what is the truth of my Being prior to all the bullshit nonsense of the mind. That is all that is required for self-realization.

a friend of mine is a carpenter and we've been playing around with seiza-esque bench protoypes. i'm wondering, anyone have any creative ideas for meditation bench, chair, seat innovations? or even just some useful incremental improvements ... thanks, sean

if what we are calling illusion an illusion becoz our sensory perception may not judge everything exactly just right? then yes, i agree there is alot of illusion in this world. however this does not mean that our world is not real. it does exist. to see the world as it truly is requires that one would remove their ego and delusions. a dream is different than an illusion.

That's, of course, the ideal. (More accurately, one amongst several ideals, because there are also teachings where you simply leave the world to become a hermit.) If you read traditional Chinese novels (such as The Dream of the Red Mansion), then you'll definitely find people who did not live up to the ideal. The primary Neo-Confucian attack on Buddhism was that Buddhist monks did not marry and have children. This was a big no-no in Chinese culture - You're defaulting on your obligation to your ancestors if you don't have kids. I guess this point is no longer relevant in today's world, since so many people don't have kids due to lifestyle choices anyway - Buddhist householders might actually be more traditional and have more kids than the average Chinese household. (A while ago, however, a famous genius math student left his study to join a monastery. A heated debate ensued in the Chinese net.) ...... As for the Eastern/Western issue which some other commentators have mentioned, my personal view is that it really doesn't matter. Just pick a path and stick with it, meanwhile being respectful of other paths as much as possible. The fact is that Eastern teachings are actually more accessible to a lot of Westerners now than "Western teachings". (Without going into the fact that a lot of "Western teachings", e.g. Golden Dawn, Wicca, are actually reconstructed or even invented traditions. Since all traditions ultimately come from somewhere and have to be "invented", I don't mean any less respect to invented traditions. However, the issue of Eastern vs. Western is a false dilemma in my view - Daoism absorbed a lot from Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Christianity, too. The way I see it, the way traditions converge and diverge is simply messy. It's never an easy task to categorise something as Chinese, Western, Indian, or otherwise.)

To state, "First there is a mountain" implies that one is in ignorance,...that they believe the dream is real. In meditation, if properly done, "there is no mountain." However, to truly understand the emptiness of the mountain, is to understand the form of the mountain. Enlightenment is not realizing the mountain existed as form or emptiness,...but that it never existed. Enlightenment is simply a awareness of the Present. No mountain ever existed in the Present. There is no Present in time. V To quote Nisargadatta With wisdom I see that I am nothing With love I see I am everything My life dances in between the two

To state, "First there is a mountain" implies that one is in ignorance,...that they believe the dream is real. In meditation, if properly done, "there is no mountain." However, to truly understand the emptiness of the mountain, is to understand the form of the mountain. Enlightenment is not realizing the mountain existed as form or emptiness,...but that it never existed. Enlightenment is simply a awareness of the Present. No mountain ever existed in the Present. There is no Present in time. V

Mr Mair puts all that in Section 6 Chapter 1, so i made a mistake and posted it all under what Legge calls Chapter 6 Section A. I will repost it here. Sorry for the confusion! from Wandering on the Way: Taoist Tales and Parables by Victor Mair To know the actions of heaven and to know the actions of man, that's the ultimate! She who knows the actions of heaven will live in accordance with heaven. She who knows the actions of men can nourish what is unknown to her intellect with what is known to her intellect. Thus she can live out the years allotted to her by heaven and not die midway. This is the height of knowledge. However, there is still some difficulty. Namely, knowledge has to depend on something for its consequent accuracy, but that which it depends on is particularly unstable. How do we know that what we attribute to heaven may not be due to man, and that what we attribute to man may not be due to heaven? Only when there is a true man is there true knowledge. What is a true man? The true man of old did not oppose the minority, did not strive for heroic accomplishments, and did not scheme over affairs. Such being the case, he did not regret it when he made a mistake nor feel smug when he was right. Such being the case, he could climb high without trembling, enter water without getting soaked, and enter fire without feeling hot. Only one whose knowledge can ascend the heights of the Way can be like this. The true man of old did not dream when he slept and did not worry when he was awake. His food was not savory, his breathing was deep. The breathing of the true man is from his heels, the breathing of the common man is from his throat. The words of those who unwillingly yield catch in their throats as though they were retching. Those whose desires are deep-seated will have shallow natural reserves. The true man of old knew neither fondness for life nor aversion to death, was neither elated by going forth nor reluctant to return. Casually he went and casually he came. He neither forgot what his beginning had been nor sought what his end would be. Happily he received and forgetfully he returned. This is what is meant by not detracting from the Way with the mind, not assisting heaven with the human. This is what we call a true man. Such being the case, his mind was forgetful, his visage calm, his forehead beamingly broad. Austere as autumn, warm as spring, his joy and anger were in touch with the four seasons. He was compatible with all things but no one knew his limits The true man of old Was towering in stature but never collapsed, Seemed insufficient but accepted nothing; Aloofly independent but not obstinate, Amply empty but not ostentatious , Merry, as though he were happy, Demurring, as though he were compelled, Suffused with an alluring charm, Endowed with an arresting integrity, Stern, as though he were worldly, Arrogant, as though he were uncontrollable, Reticent, as though he preferred to clam up, Absent-minded, as though he forgot what to say. Thus his likes were reduced to one and his dislikes were also reduced to one. His "one" was one and his "not one" was also one. Being "one," he was a follower of heaven. Being "not one" he was a follower of man. He in whom neither heaven nor man is victorious over the other is called a true man.

from Wandering on the Way: Taoist Tales and Parables by Victor Mair To know the actions of heaven and to know the actions of man, that's the ultimate! She who knows the actions of heaven will live in accordance with heaven. She who knows the actions of men can nourish what is unknown to her intellect with what is known to her intellect. Thus she can live out the years allotted to her by heaven and not die midway. This is the height of knowledge. However, there is still some difficulty. Namely, knowledge has to depend on something for its consequent accuracy, but that which it depends on is particularly unstable. How do we know that what we attribute to heaven may not be due to man, and that what we attribute to man may not be due to heaven? Only when there is a true man is there true knowledge. What is a true man? The true man of old did not oppose the minority, did not strive for heroic accomplishments, and did not scheme over affairs. Such being the case, he did not regret it when he made a mistake nor feel smug when he was right. Such being the case, he could climb high without trembling, enter water without getting soaked, and enter fire without feeling hot. Only one whose knowledge can ascend the heights of the Way can be like this. The true man of old did not dream when he slept and did not worry when he was awake. His food was not savory, his breathing was deep. The breathing of the true man is from his heels, the breathing of the common man is from his throat. The words of those who unwillingly yield catch in their throats as though they were retching. Those whose desires are deep-seated will have shallow natural reserves. The true man of old knew neither fondness for life nor aversion to death, was neither elated by going forth nor reluctant to return. Casually he went and casually he came. He neither forgot what his beginning had been nor sought what his end would be. Happily he received and forgetfully he returned. This is what is meant by not detracting from the Way with the mind, not assisting heaven with the human. This is what we call a true man. Such being the case, his mind was forgetful, his visage calm, his forehead beamingly broad. Austere as autumn, warm as spring, his joy and anger were in touch with the four seasons. He was compatible with all things but no one knew his limits The true man of old Was towering in stature but never collapsed, Seemed insufficient but accepted nothing; Aloofly independent but not obstinate, Amply empty but not ostentatious , Merry, as though he were happy, Demurring, as though he were compelled, Suffused with an alluring charm, Endowed with an arresting integrity, Stern, as though he were worldly, Arrogant, as though he were uncontrollable, Reticent, as though he preferred to clam up, Absent-minded, as though he forgot what to say. Thus his likes were reduced to one and his dislikes were also reduced to one. His "one" was one and his "not one" was also one. Being "one," he was a follower of heaven. Being "not one" he was a follower of man. He in whom neither heaven nor man is victorious over the other is called a true man.

it is but a dream. a dream that i share. it would require that folks would be self-responsible. self-reliant. self moderating(like here on TTB!) it would require that folks genuinely cared about and for their neighbors. not exactly anarchy proper, but a useful model imo is the Iriquios Confederation. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/294660/Iroquois-Confederacy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois did they have a perfect system? perhaps not. was it workable? yeppers. -K- does make some good points that would need considered. seemed the iriquois were thriving until those (us) darned europeans started involving themselves into the mix. smaller scale intentional community may be the way to go.

Reifying only happens when you see something inherent and solid, like a moon made of green cheese and a truly existing santa claus (for example). I don't see a truly existing 'non-reifying' so I don't reify 'non-reifying'. Since I do not assert/view/establish a truly existing thing or the non-existence of a thing, I do not grasp on them. Then it is Just B and Just C. Like the Zen masters say. When sitting, just sit. When eating apple, just eating apple, and it is as if the whole universe is eating apple (all causes and conditions manifest as eating apple). A monk comes to the monastery of Master Zhaozhou and asks for instruction. The master asks him, “Have you had your breakfast?” The monk says that he has. “Then wash your bowls,” is the Master’s reply, and the only instruction he offers. In abhidhamma, they talk about time units and milliseconds etc, which is interesting but I don't study abhidhamma and I don't remember numbers well. Ultimately, the transience turns out to be timeless, complete, whole, and yet self-releasing. You don't experience movement even though there is change (but no changing things). There is no real 'where' because what dependently originates is empty of a locatable core or essence. What dependently originates is empty, means empty of locatable core. 'A' is thus empty of 'A-ness'. There are two insights and experiences - the Maha experience (integrating anatta with dependent origination) described above, which Zen and Zen Master Dogen emphasizes, and the 'dependently originated is empty of a locatable core and thus illusory, dream-like' which Mahamudra and Dzogchen emphasizes. We should integrate these two insights, then we will understand these two traditions. But on the other hand, a pure Zennist may not understand Mahamudra, and Mahamudra person may not understand a Zennist because their emphasis and practice is different. But it does not mean one insight is less valuable than another, therefore we should integrate them. Everything becomes a process of interconnected activities. The person, the stick, the bell, hitting, air, ears, etc, i.e. the conditions, all comes together and then manifests itself as the drumbeat sound - and in that sound JUST the sound but it is the entire universe coming together and manifesting the sound. This can lead to the Maha sort of insight and experience. You may want to read the Genjokoan article I typed out more carefully. Thoughts being produced by brain does not mean thought = brain or thought happens in brain, but anyway I do not hold such materialistic views. Also, the notion that thoughts abide and come from the head is not something that holds up to experiential investigation. Thought and sense perceptions are appearances that dependently originates and are empty of any locatable essence. The principle of dependent origination and emptiness is not too difficult to understand conceptually, but to realize it experientially is not as simple, which is why Buddha calls it a very deep truth. First realize anatta, otherwise D.O. will be misunderstood. The principle is as such: “That which arose from conditions is unborn; It has no arising by virtue of intrinsic existence. Since it depends on other conditions it is empty.” -Gungthang Tempai Drome One last point: emptiness isn't just not finding the whereabouts and location of something, it means there is no CORE of something, therefore no location. As I said before you can realize I AM and say it is not locatable, but it is not realizing anatta or emptiness. In other words saying I AM is not locatable is not the same as realizing no self, not finding the whereabout of thought does not mean realizing 'no thought'. Realization of emptiness means realizing no core of thought thus no locatable core of thought, it is dependently originated and empty. But the realization is not just about 'not finding the whereabouts'. I'm rushing out so I'll stop here.

Awesome -- Oh this is my follow up blog post on Amanita Muscaria -- and it's connection to DMT and the "time loop" DMT visions -- Amanita Muscaria does have an MAOI effect to vastly increase the serotonin levels just like DMT, etc. http://naturalresonancerevolution.blogspot.com/2011/10/fly-agaric-loop-as-dmt-dream-state-aka.html

No, I did say I am right and that many others had similar experiences but they are two issues. My point was that what I discovered can be seen by anyone because it is a plain fact waiting to be discovered by doing some investigation and contemplation, it is not a 'reserved' truth. Those are just examples pointing out the possibility of spontaneous, non-conceptual experiences, which are aspects of wisdom but not the totality of it. In other words experience of spontaneity, non-conceptual experiences (which everyone has experienced some time in their life) does not indicate wisdom. Even NDNCDIMOP does not indicate wisdom. It may simply be a peak experience. Wisdom must arise from realization, the realization of twofold emptiness that turns deluded cognition into correct cognition, in other words cognition undeluded by any false views of inherent self or objects. As an example? There is no example for an ignorant person: only Buddhas are able to comprehend wisdom. The most I can describe is like Kalaka sutta: in seeing there is just the suchness of the seen without establishing a cognizer or something cognized (luminous yet illusory). It's like asking "how do you know you are not reifying a moon made of green chase?" "how do you know you are not reifying a santa claus?" I do not, because I do not see a moon made of green cheese nor do I believe in something called santa claus. Similarly, I do not see anything inherent or graspable called "non-reification". You are confusing me with your own confusion of me. Or maybe I didn't explain myself well. I am saying, uninvestigated framework of viewing self and things dualistically and inherently must be seen through and relinquished, but it can only be done so by realization. A is a new phenomenon and thus disjoint from B and C, but it is the manifestation of the causal interaction of B and C, so it is like the universe is manifesting as A - a complete, whole, non-dual phenomenon. Another analogy: under dualistic framework, we misinterprete dependent origination to mean subject reflecting external conditions. But actually this is not the case - in seeing just the seen - dependent origination means the whole universe of all causes and condition exerting itself into JUST A - so "A" contains all of "Not A" but is itself 'unconditioned' (not subject interacting external objects) 'complete-in-itself' manifestation of 'Just A'. I might post something later on Zen Master Dogen's Genjokoan which I think is good. The point is that there is no core behind appearances, since appearances dependently originate without substantiality. It is not that 'flower has no core' but 'there is no flower-core or flower-ness behind an appearance conventionally labelled as flower'. To say 'flower has no core' or 'self has no core' already suppose that there is a self. But when we say appearances are empty of core, we merely reject the view of existence since appearance that dependently originate are empty of any inherent core. But anyway what we realize is that all manifestation dependently originate, all phenomenon dependently originates and thus are empty of any inherent existence. Therefore, a flower cannot be established - phenomenon dependently originate. There is no 'a flower' since all phenomenon dependently originates and thus are empty. This is the case for all phenomenon and not just phenomenon experienced subjectively. When we realize that what appears dependently originates and is empty, we are not saying 'everything experienced is just mental events so whatever experienced are illusory' (in this case it just means whatever experienced is mental and illusory but does not say anything about phenomenon beyond subjective awareness) but 'all phenomenon dependently originates and are empty of any inherent core, substance, locatable essence that can be pinned down', in other words dependent origination and emptiness applies and is the nature of all phenomenon, mind or matter. (Ultimately, there is no mind and no matter, since all phenomenon mind or matter dependently originate and are fundamentally empty, mind and matter are just conventions about a bunch of illusory empty phenomenon.) This is why I said earlier that this is not about denying what we observe nor to say that there’s no reality outside the mind, but simply that no ‘reality in itself’ exists. Phenomena only appears in dependence on other phenomena. By first realizing anatta and then further penetrating and seeing everything as dependently originated activities, followed by a deeper insight into the emptiness of all phenomenon. This is nothing inferred. In the Buddhist understanding of things, plants in itself does not have consciousness but then a spirit may 'take residence' in a tree or plant. Let's not even talk about plants. Let's talk about people and animals. Obviously, people and animals have consciousness. But does that mean 'consciousness' is an entity that is located and residing in a particular location in the human body? Not really, as consciousness is fundamentally empty and dependently origianted as well, empty of any core or location. But it can appear to an untrained mind that consciousness is located somewhere as an atomic entity or soul. This is not the case when anatta and emptiness is realized - consciousness is simply a mental experience without subject and object, without localization. It is not something you can pin down in one part of the body and say 'there it is!' So even if plants have awareness (which they don't) that doens't mean plants have an independent, inherent existence. Awareness and consciousness are also anatta, dependently originated, and empty. Having consciousness does not mean there is a Self. How do I know that? Anatta and Emptiness is the nature of all phenomenon and this is realized to be the case, non-inferentially. One realizes that the whole view of 'seer-seeing-seen', the whole view of agency, of a self-entity is completely delusional. There is no such thing! Never was there a 'self'. It is as delusional as the delusion of the existence of moon made of green cheese, rabbits with horn, santa claus, etc. Uh no, I never said there was 'existence'. I mean since all things are empty, whatever labels 'mind', 'matter' are mere conventions like 'weather' or 'river' but actually don't point to an inherent, locatable core or substance of things. Thought is something you can observe in plain sight (not in the visual sense but in the mental sense) so obviously it is not hiding somewhere like your kidneys (if you presume the existence of kidneys). The presumption is that what is observed has its location somewhere, but when you look at where thought abides, where it comes from and where it goes to, the thought-ness of thought cannot be found, non-arisen and no-cessation. Thought is seen to be a magical apparition, illusory, dream-like. The same goes to all sense perceptions as well.

No, you cannot say that (LOL). Evangelism is a Christian term,...you could say "MFPOS proselytizing atheist SOB", and I wouldn't object. However, I do agree that you come off as an evangelist, because of your clinginess to Christian concepts. Of course, that does not make you better or worse than a "MFPOS proselytizing atheist SOB",...because you are both arguing beliefs. For example,...I understand that there is no god,...but I'm not an atheist, because atheists "believe" in no god. I could be labled a Buddhist in that I neither believe nor dis-believe in a god,...(and use a path of practice and spiritual development, largely based on the oral instructions of Sakyamuni Buddha, which lead to the understanding of both the relative and absolute nature of reality.) Belief in a god is a belief that there is a creation. And yet there is no creation,...just a dream. Non-believers in a god also believe in a creation, although one that happened without a creator. What they fail to reason, is that all beliefs are dishonest. If a belief were true, it would not be a belief. V

Wu Wei is not blue-green algae,...Wu Wei is without vibration, thus without color. How can this be understood? As an analogy, the Heart-Center is not only the 7th point, or interlacing of the Magen David, but the 7th sense or Consciousness. The 7th sense (which vibrates as the color of green light) is not the transcendental or 8th sense; however, the 7th sense (Heart Center) is the gate so-to-say to the 8th sense (Heart-Mind). The 8th sense vibrates as white light. If you spin green light with red light (the physical center) and violet light (the mental center) it makes white light. Thus, considering the descension into form, white light is as the first expression on the fulcrum of the Clear, Undivided Light of Wu Wei. All moving things are unbalanced. Once there is balance, things no longer move (vibrate), and thus their condition instantly dissolves,...and with it the perceived energy it embodied. In the Stillness of Wu Wei there is no energy, no motion, no conditions, no opposites, no knowledge. Energy, motion, conditions, opposites, and knowledge are imagined characteristics experienced through the lower six sense organs in time. Everything experienced in time is experienced in the past. There is no Present in time. Wu Wei is the Present. Jamgon Kongtrul explains... "Actual phenomena - that is, the world and its inhabitants - are objects that we grasp at with our senses. These appearances are simply our mind's manifestations of confusion. In the end, they are not actually existent in any way whatsoever, but are like the appearances in a dream." V

No! Undivided Light is not form,...no form (energy, mass, nor time) can enter Undivided Light. A fulcrum is not form,...it's a fulcrum,...Still, Causeless, Dimensionless,...upon which duality effects its perceived motion. No! I did not get Undivided Light from Walter Russell,...although, when you strip-out Walter Russell's beliefs from his science, he does articulate the nature of Divided Light, although he uses other terms. Undivided Light cannot be known through the 6 senses,...the 6 senses only detect motion,...motion is an illusion,...no different from a dream,...often called maya. We CANNOT "listen" to formless, Undivided Light,...to listen implies vibration,...the still, fulcrum of Wu Wei does not vibrate. "haha" I had my first direct experience with Undivided Light in December 1974. V

Vortex -- on the whole reincarnation deal -- O.K. there's been life on Earth for billions of years. humans represent like the last half of a minute of life on earth if the timespan was one hour for all of the time of life on earth. Humans are just a tiny fragment of time for life on Earth. So let's consider reincarnation considering the big picture of life on earth -- humans -- half a minute. The rest of life - 59 minutes and 30 seconds. O.K. so bacteria -- well give that say 50 minutes of life on Earth. Seriously I'm just guessing here -- but even just 450 million years ago the biggest life form was not a plant but a fungus -- a mushroom. O.K. so 280 million years ago the dominant life form on earth was the Gorgon -- a reptile that was like a mammal needing lots of oxygen and it was big like a dog. Wham -- Permian extinction. Life restarts aka mass reincarnation. Evolution. "progress?" Dinosaurs - the smartest one was the troodon -- biggest brained dino -- about as big as a human -- on two legs. Wham. K/T boundary kicks in. global extinction. The little shrew mammal survives in the trees. 60 million years later that little tree shrew now is primate mammals as well. The inner ear of the primate used to be the jaw bone of the tree shrew. O.K. so that's "progress" right? I mean spiritually? Voila -- finally we get some humans on the scene around 1 million years ago. It's only been a few billion years of life on earth. haha. O.K. but wait with the modern humans starting 10,000 years ago suddenly all the other life on earth is dying. Oh no - it's another global extinction crisis just like when the Gorgons went extinct 280 million years ago and when the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago. Only now it's the humans and the humans are taking down the rest of life with them. Oh but wait - -humans are different -- they are "spiritually evolved" (i.e. progress). -- humans don't have a population explosion, reach ecological carrying capacity, hit overlimit and their population crashes - like every other life form on the planet. No humans "reincarnate" and progess spiritually. haha. I smell snake oil here - -yeah Ramana Maharshi said this about spiritual evolution: There is no evolution. That's a direct quote. So maybe part of us goes into a rock and gets stuck there -- I read a Buddhist book that described this. Imagine being reincarnated into a rock. I've read that when people crap when they die then their spirit goes out their ass and presto -- gone to hell? Bodri says how most people die like that -- the spirit going out the ass. the Tibetans state that which end of the body determines heaven or hell - just read the book of the dead for the details. The book "Taoist Yoga" states to not take a crap if you're going to leak chi out the backside. haha. It's the chi energy that powers the spirit after death. So if we don't build up chi energy to power the light spirit then we turn into ghosts. I have seen ghosts. I think they have emotional blockages holding them to Earth. So too much corporeal soul energy maybe? Or call it the etheric body sticking to their astral body? Yeah I've read in Master Nan, Huai-chin that if a person is good and religious -- moral -- then they do go to heaven. For example when I found my dad's dead body last spring and he was all blue -- suddenly my heart got filled with love. This surprised me since it was the most love I had ever felt with my dad before. But I knew that he must be in a better place than he was in his body. Also the show on CIA-cable -- "I Survived: Beyond and Back" - is very amazing for the spirit OBE NDE stories of people who clinically died and came back. Going to heaven or going to hell! Then if they do go to hell they come back completely transformed -- and become good people for their "second" life. Truly amazing. Also people who go to heaven come back transformed to be even more spiritual people. So Ramana Maharshi said that his cow become completely enlightened -- fully realized! He sent the cow special shakti energy to the heart as it was dying. Just like he did for his mom when she died -- so both the cow and the mom did not have to reincarnate as they had finally achieved "eternal liberation." Ramana Maharshi called that "cutting the knot" of the heart. But then Bodri and Master Nan, Huai-chin claim that unless the body is transformed if you do just mind yoga then when the body is sick like it was for Ramana Maharshi that means when you die your brain does not have the chi energy to maintain awareness -- so the awareness falls back into nothingness of impersonal consciousness. In Mahayana Buddhism unless the person maintains awareness of the impersonal consciousness then they are not truly enlightened but this is not the case for advaita vedanta. I, myself, side with Advaita Vedanta. Chunyi Lin says there is no "center" to the universe and that everything is constantly transforming and so there will always be reincarnation or rebirth if people want to call it that. It seems like parts of us stick around the grave or where we die as the etheric or corporeal soul and other parts go into a dream like astral realm that is more real than Earth. Be it heaven or hell. Then some of us go back to Earth...but maybe not as humans. As far as life on other planets I've read some claiming you can reincarnate on other planets -- I think yogananda stated this. Personally I'm not a big believer in advanced life on other planets. Which is a wild thing not to believe because the universe is so infinitely infinite. but science has shown that planet EArth is also incredibly rare in how life evolved here and how much time it took for "advanced" life to evolve. That it's almost like the universe evolved over billions of years just for life on Earth to evolve, etc. I mean science still seems to put Earth in the center of the universe even though cosmos-wise we are less than dust mites. Planet earth is just a speck of dust on the cosmic scheme of things. haha. So how about this -- no evolution. No reincarnation. That's what Ramana Maharshi says. No individual spirit. Impersonal consciousness is the real reality -- eternally "evolving" to create energy and matter and space and time -- a process of infinite love and light and also infinite destruction and darkness. But nevertheless it's possible for the human to unite with the love and light part of this process -- even if it is on an individual subjective level.

Yeah that was when I lived in the city. I am a country boy who lived in the city. haha. Born and raised in the city. But now I live in the country. I am clearing ten acres of forest of the invasive European buckthorn -- brought here by the genocidal colonizers who had a bounty on the Dakota native american indigenous -- driving them out of the state. Yes the Dakota have returned to Minnesota thankfully and are fighting to get back their land and to expose the genocide against them! Minnesota had a concentration camp at the junction of the Mississippi and Minnesota river - the sacred origin of the world for the Dakota! But 1200 Dakota were kept there after a forced march across the winter of minnesota -- and then hundreds died there in the camp over the winter and also were tossed out the packed railroad cars when forced out of the state onto reservations. Ah but that was way back in 1862 -- where the largest mass hanging in the U.S. occurred in Mankato minnesota of 38 Dakota men and when Chunyi Lin went there to teach qigong to old people Chunyi Lin saw these giant spirits that were stern and dangerous -- guarding the place. He asked his friend what happened there and he learned of the mass hanging. Chunyi Lin said he didn't dare tell anyone about the spirits that were huge and stern -- watching over him while he taught qigong. He had to be very careful. Yeah the past and the future -- how amazingly they interweave with precognitive visions! When I was doing serious earth first activism I had a dream that came true three years later -- a dream that was more real than being awake! I wrote it down and wrote I thought it would come true. Then I forgot about it until three years later when I saw a photo of my earth first friends with Native Americans -- Dakota -- standing on the roof of a house -- holding a banner -- to protect a wooded area in the city. It was the last remnant of original Big Woods (maple-basswood) in the Twin Cities Minnesota and also the most sacred area for the Dakota. Also that land is still owned by the Dakota -- the 1805 treaty was illegal and invalid. Ah by that's the past. Let's not dwell on the past when we have such a bright future! haha. Nah I say the eternal present is the real deal. haha. So anyway now I do humanure compost - ah but dwelling in my own shit is not a solution is it? YES IT IS! haha. When I visited the most traditional Berber village they relied on humanure to feed themselves -- to grow their vegetables and wheat -- to transform the desert soil into fertile farming. Yeah so now I do humanure compost as my ancient futures salute to the Berber women I met who all raised their fists and shouted when one truck drove by on the new gravel road put in by the government of Morocco. Ah by that was the past -- 1997 - or was it thousands of years ago -- a sustainable culture for thousands of years. Nah now it's being "modernized" -- haha. Modernized -- in 500 years genocide has wiped out half of the world's human languages. Ah but let's not dwell on that except that hundreds of languages are going extinct right now. Ah but that's the past. I mean it was the past when I just typed it. Right. haha. Anyway so I am gardening with my new humanure compost that I also make using biochar -- charcoal that has micropores for the bacteria to live in and was the secret of how the Indians lived and farmed in the Amazon since the soil there has no nutrients since it gets sucked into the trees as the turn over rate is so fast for decay in the forest. Yeah so I turn the evil invasive buckthorn into biochar and mix it with my humanure crap and urine and let it compost and it turns into amazing fertile miracle goodness. then I plant seeds to grow food. I am also planting trees and bushes for nuts and fruits. So my family thinks its foolish but I say -- hey with 7 billion people on the planet the more food the better. There is a new program in the Twin Cities minnesota to plant fruit trees and donate the fruit to food shelves! Yeah why not? haha. So hopefully in five years there will be chestnuts on our land of ten acres but it should only take me two more years to clear the buckthorn and then I'll probably get kicked out by the females living off their spouses' money. haha. It costs $3000 an acre to remove buckthorn and it's a four year project -- but I'm just using hand tools - -a pick axe and hand saw -- no nasty chemicals that kill the bacteria of the forest. I am also harvest mushrooms -- I ate seven different kind so far including Amanita Muscaria! haha. The Soma! Right in our forest -- amazing since it's not known for Minnesota. Yeah we also have the rare Hooded Warbler in our forest -- only three known sites have reproduction in Minnesota. And we had a nest on our land but I couldn't find any new baby bird hatchling brood yet. Last summer just the male returned and called in the high trees looking for a female. Ah well - they spend the winter in Cozumel off the Yucatan Peninsula -- which ironically is where my parents went for their honeymoon in 1965 and returned many times -- probably a dozen. haha. I went there once and snorkeled for six hours a day. Awesome. Yeah last night I dreamt I was underwater with this beautiful young female who had been my coworker and she said my eyes were so bright green and I said - -it's because I eat spirulina all the time. haha. Spirulina is amazing stuff -- I mean it converts -- it's the secret real source for OIL. Just think the world is running out of oil - -but they are starting to make oil out of spirulina because algae is the real source for oil anyway. But still this whole biofuel thing is a scam - there is professor at Cornell who figured out that -- what was the figure -- something like all the solar energy on the planet that creates the energy of plants would only supply two days worth of oil use for current use. Something like that. In other words there's absolutely no way we can replace our extraction of millions of years of stored oil energy with biofuels or solar energy -- to make hydrogen and electricity, etc. http://www.grist.org/article/philpott2 Oh it's David Pimentel - -he says photovoltaics collect ten times more energy than plants do from the sun.... so anyway electricity though is not oil. Nope humans are just sucking up millions of years of energy from life on the planet -- for what -- a fun ride that's what. haha.